The Crucial Issue I landed on from the six was number three: “We need to clarify how
human responsibility and suffering relate to one another” (Powlison 2010, 241). This
happens to be the exact concept that I am currently debating in my Interdisciplinary
Research class. This concept intertwines the disciplines of the Old Testament and
Psychology.
This crucial step requires the counselor to satisfy their need to introduce sin and introduce
it to the counselee for analysis of the issue they are seeking counseling. Christian
counselors must not fear secular counselors or their secular education (Powlison 2010,
278). By the example of Moses, Daniel and Paul, secular theory must be used to counter
and prove the words and meaning of the Bible. Sin is ultimately the problem in anything, but
how it is understood is what leads a counselee to a Christian or secular base for therapy
(Powlison 2010, 289-292). In the world of secular counseling, “elaborate systems that
rationalize sin by making people fundamentally victims determined by forces outside their
control” (Powlison 2010, 246), take away the need for the counselee to take responsibility
for their moral choices. These contemporary victim theories “ground our sins in our pain
and our ‘needs’” (Powlison 2010, 247). What sin does to man is that it “exerts a systematic
distorting effect on thought and practice (Powlison 2010, 278).
Nouthetic counseling pulls from the theory of man being both responsible for their moral
actions and a sufferer from sin (Powlison 2010, 247). As Adams quoted: “Sin is the product
of flesh.” (Powlison 2010, 248) and is cast upon man as a curse from God (Gen. 3:17-19).
God then delivered man by grace through Jesus Christ (John 3:16). Secular viewpoints
allow man to be a victim and give credibility to the excuses for negative actions. While
nouthetic theory gives “context within which both human responsibility and Christ’s power
to set free operate” (Powlison 2010, 248). According to the term describing the counseling
style, the difference between Biblical Counseling and Christian Counseling is precisely
focused. The counselor must decide if they advocate for the full authority of the Bible or
counsel within a Christian aspect versus word for word from the Bible. The literal or the
insinuated by Christ is what they must answer (Powlison 2010, 274).
The other five crucial steps are essential to biblical counseling. I feel that step three is the
root of biblical counseling. If a counselee is Christian or not has no bearing on the
introduction of sin. While a Christian counselee immediately relates and understand the
introduction to sin, a non-believer or secular counselee who is genuinely seeking help,
opens to understanding why to root of the problem is sin; or any other term they may use in
place of sin, i.e., karma, needs to be further explored to dive deeper into the root of their
problem. This provides an open dialog between counselor and counselee that pushes
immediate defensiveness to the side. In return, this allows the counselee to be more
comfortable and open to the “two-fold solution” (Powlison 2010, 102) of Adams’ counseling
method.
A crucial issue “in contemporary biblical counseling is to articulate the full biblical view of
both man and man’s situation in all its power, realism, compassion, and subtlety. Then, by
SCHOLARLY ARTICLE REVIEW ON INTEGRATION
2
the grace of God, we must mature in wisdom to practice counseling in the light of such
truth” (Powlison 2010, 249).
References
Powlison, David. The Biblical Counseling Movement. Greensboro, NC: New Growth Press,
2010.
